Saturday, February 7, 2026

If You are Uncomfortable with Paradox and Mystery, You Might be Uncomfortable with Life!

One of the most distinctive habits of Catholic thought is its refusal to resolve complex moral questions by choosing one pole of a tension and rejecting the other. 


Instead, Catholic theology has repeatedly insisted that truth often lies not in eliminating contradictions but in holding opposites together in a higher unity. 


This instinct finds classical expression in coincidentia oppositorum, a term articulated by Nicholas of Cusa in the fifteenth century, but rooted more deeply in patristic theology and ultimately in what Christians believe about the mystery of the incarnation: Christ is both fully God (100 percent) and fully man (100 percent), without confusion or division.


The Christological tension, though seemingly “in the theological weeds,” is a foundational "rubber band." People argued about it, early in the development of the church, for hundreds of years.


Lots of non-Christians might argue “he was a good man, a teacher or a philosopher.” Many would find it scandalous or absurd that he could be “God in human form.” Absurd and scandalous, indeed.


And the source of continual theological dispute for centuries. So ignore the "inside baseball" nature of such debates. If you want insight into Catholic teaching on a host of social issues, coincidentia oppositorum illuminates the principles.


And they are neither simple nor absolute guides to behavior.


"Heresy," or incorrect belief, is "inside baseball" for anybody who does not claim to be a Christian.


On the other hand, as a guide to thinking about hard problems in life, coincidentia oppositorum is invaluable.


Catholic theologians might point out that heresy (from the Greek hairesis, meaning "choice") occurs when someone tries to resolve the tension by "choosing" one side. A "Both-And" thinker views a heretic not necessarily as someone who is 100 percent wrong, but as someone who is partially right at the expense of the whole. By releasing one end of the rubber band, they lose the tension of the divine mystery.


Doctrine

Pole A (The "Human/Earthly")

Pole B (The "Divine/Heavenly")

The Stretched Tension (The "Both-And")

The Incarnation

Fully Human: Jesus felt hunger, wept, and died.

Fully Divine: Jesus is the eternal Word, the Creator.

Hypostatic Union: He is not a hybrid, but one person in two complete natures.

The Bible

Human Authors: Written in specific styles, eras, and languages.

Divine Author: Every word is inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Dual Authorship: God speaks through human instruments without bypassing their humanity.

The Church

Visible Institution: A hierarchy with buildings, laws, and flawed people.

Invisible Mystical Body: A spiritual reality united to Christ.

The Sacrament of Salvation: The visible structure is the "sign" of the invisible grace.

Salvation

Human Effort: We must cooperate, repent, and "run the race."

Divine Grace: Salvation is a free gift we cannot earn.

Synergy: Grace moves the will so that the person can freely act.

Eschatology

Already: The Kingdom of God is here now in the Church.

Not Yet: The Kingdom is a future reality after the Second Coming.

Realized Eschatology: We live in the "in-between" time of the present and the promise.

God's Nature

Immanent: God is closer to us than we are to ourselves.

Transcendent: God is totally "Other," beyond all categories.

The Sacramental Principle: The infinite God is found within the finite world.

Mary

Virgin: Total devotion and purity set apart for God.

Mother: Biological, physical fruitfulness and nurturing.

Virgin-Mother: The paradox of being "Theotokos" (God-bearer).


The practical result is that the answer to many questions is essentially “it’s a mystery.” But the answer to many practical questions also involves maintaining a tension between apparent opposites.


Catholic social teaching does not offer a neat ideology, nor does it map cleanly onto modern political categories of “left” and “right.” 


Instead, it consistently affirms pairs of principles that appear, at first glance, to be in tension: individual dignity and the common good; private property and universal destination of goods; authority and participation; justice and mercy; life’s inviolability and compassion for human weakness.


The "Both-And" approach isn't just a polite way of avoiding a decision; it is a commitment to paradox.


Think of Catholic theology as a stretched rubber band. If you let go of one side to make things "simpler" or "more logical," the rubber band goes limp and loses its power. The energy, or Catholic assertions about  "truth,” exists precisely because of the tension between the two poles.


The result is a body of teaching that frustrates ideological purists but remains remarkably coherent when understood through the lens of coincidentia oppositorum. 


Catholic social doctrine does not split the difference between opposites, nor does it oscillate opportunistically between them. 


Rather, it insists that each pole is incomplete without the other, and that only by holding both together can society approximate the truth about the human person. So “both-and” rather than “either-or.”


A finite human reason sees contradictions because it cannot fully grasp infinite truth. What appear as opposites at the human level coincide at the divine level: so truth often transcends binary logic without dissolving it.


So see so often encounter apparent opposites:

  • God is transcendent (beyond or above physical human experience) and yet immanent (present everywhere; internal in things)

  • Christ is judge and savior

  • The Cross is simultaneously defeat and victory

  • The Kingdom is already present and not yet fulfilled

  • Jesus is 100 percent human and 100 percent God

  • God is infinitely just and infinitely merciful

  • Humans are “saved” individually (choice) and yet salvation also is collective (we are different parts of a single body as a metaphor)

  • Reality is material and spiritual

  • We exist in time, but occasionally, as at the Mass, the eternal (outside of time) meets those within time

  • Humans have free will and therefore real agency, but there is also a plan

  • Human prayers occur within time, but can operate outside of time and place

  • Catholic social theory supports both the right of private property and the right of unions to operate that restrict unrestricted rights of private property

  • Work is a commodity exchanged in a market, but also a participation in God’s creative action

  • The right of private property coexists with an obligation to share benefits (universal destination of goods)

  • Support for economic initiative and entrepreneurship but also social responsibility and solidarity

  • Property rights but also the universal destination of goods

  • Both subsidiarity (protects personal and local freedom) and solidarity (moral responsibility across social boundaries)

  • Absolute defense of unborn life, the disabled, the elderly, and the terminally ill, as human life possesses inviolable dignity from conception to natural death; yet the need for mercy, accompaniment, and compassion

  • Moral truth is not negated by compassion, and compassion does not relativize truth

  • Mercy (punishment is withheld) does not mean denying sin, but justice (you get what you deserve) does not mean abandoning sinners

  • Affirming the legitimacy of law, borders, and social order, while simultaneously insisting that these structures serve the human person, especially the vulnerable

  • Social responsibility and personal accountability.


At a polarized time where people seemingly prefer simple answers and absolute alignments, Catholic social teaching remains stubbornly mysterious; a unity of opposites; a refusal to embrace simple “either-or” positions. 


It’s a stretched rubber band. 


Friday, February 6, 2026

AI Capex is a Time-Tested Moat-Building Move

Investors might be quite concerned about the vast expansion of capital investment being made by some hyperscalers to support their artificial intelligence aspirations. 


But there is an established logic here that has played out in the past in the computing industry: high capital expenditure is one of the most formidable barriers to entry in the computing industry, particularly in semiconductors, cloud infrastructure, and AI. 


The strategy also is evident in other industries and domains. 


source: Bloomberg


This is rational, though concerning to many investors. 


Dominant firms with access to massive capital can make enormous infrastructure investments that raise the minimum viable scale for competition. 


This creates a self-reinforcing cycle where competitors must either match the investment to remain relevant or accept a permanent competitive disadvantage. 


Eventually, the capital requirements become so extreme that new entrants are effectively locked out, and smaller competitors are forced to exit or consolidate. The strategic value to hyperscalers includes:

  • Preemptive positioning: By building capacity ahead of demand, they occupy strategic positions before competitors can respond.

  • Credible commitment: Massive sunk costs signal to competitors and investors that the incumbent won't easily retreat from the market.

  • Economies of scale: Higher fixed costs create steeper learning curves and better unit economics that smaller players can't match.

  • Talent and supplier lock-in: Large capex programs secure scarce engineering talent and manufacturing capacity.


Jensen Huang, Nvidia CEO, has emphasized that scale in AI computing creates "moats" that are difficult to cross. And, in recent days, we have seen hyperscale cloud providers routinely announce capex figures in earnings calls as competitive signals. 


Semiconductor executives also have explicitly discussed capacity additions as deterrents to new fab construction by competitors.


Sector

Companies

Capex Scale

Barrier Effect

Potential Strategic Element

Semiconductor Fabs

TSMC advanced nodes

$30-40B per advanced fab; ~$100B total 2023-2025

Only 3 companies globally can produce leading-edge chips (TSMC, Samsung, Intel)

TSMC's aggressive capacity expansion maintains 50%+ market share; timing announcements ahead of Samsung

AI Infrastructure

Microsoft/OpenAI

$100B+ planned over multiple years for AI datacenters

Creates computational advantage for training frontier models

Announced investments signal to competitors the scale needed to compete in AI

Cloud Computing

AWS, Azure, GCP

$50-60B annually each in datacenter capex

Requires global footprint of datacenters; new entrants can't match geographic coverage

Continuous expansion makes it economically irrational for new hyperscalers to emerge

GPU Manufacturing

NVIDIA

$11B+ in datacenter infrastructure (2023)

Combined with CUDA ecosystem, creates vertical integration barrier

Aggressive pre-positioning before AI boom locked in supply chain

Memory Manufacturing

Samsung, SK Hynix, Micron

$20-40B per company annually

Only 3 major DRAM producers remain after consolidation

Counter-cyclical investment during downturns forces exits by weaker players

EUV Lithography

ASML

€6B+ R&D over decades; €20B+ facilities

Single supplier globally; complete monopoly

Not replicable by competitors; 30+ year moat

Custom Silicon

Google TPU program

Multi-billion dollar investment in custom ASICs

Vertical integration advantage in AI/ML workloads

Reduces dependence on NVIDIA; raises bar for cloud competitors

Hyperscale Datacenters

Meta

$28-37B capex guidance (2024)

AI training and inference infrastructure

Explicit strategy to build capacity exceeding near-term needs


So there is a rational logic at work here. The computing industry increasingly resembles other capital-intensive industries such as aerospace or pharmaceuticals, where high barriers to entry lead to oligopolistic market structures


Investing now increases the odds that a particular hyperscaler will emerge as a leader when the industry matures. 


Historians might note that the principle works in other spheres of life as well. President Ronald Reagan, for example, deliberately provoked an arms race with the Soviet Union, betting that the USSR could not keep up. He won that bet. 


Nor is the strategy unusual. 


The logic of "investment wars" operates across many domains. The underlying principle is the same: those with access to capital can raise the stakes so high that potential competitors are priced out of meaningful participation.


In each case, the dominant actor exploits asymmetric access to resources to:

  1. Raise minimum viable scale beyond what most competitors can afford

  2. Create psychological deterrence by signaling overwhelming commitment

  3. Lock in strategic assets (talent, infrastructure, relationships) before competitors can mobilize

  4. Force attrition by making competition economically irrational

  5. Establish self-reinforcing advantages where initial spending generates returns that fund further spending.


Domain

Example

Spending Scale

Mechanism

Effect

US Presidential Politics

Bloomberg 2020 primary

$1B+ on single primary campaign

Saturated airwaves in every market; hired most available campaign talent

Made it financially impossible for lower-tier candidates to get message out; hired away potential staff for other campaigns

English Football

Manchester City (2008-present)

£1.5B+ in transfers/wages over 15 years

Acquired multiple elite players per position; highest wage bill in league

Created squad depth no competitor could match; forced other clubs into unsustainable wage escalation or acceptance of second-tier status

Streaming Wars

Netflix content spending

$17B annually on content (peak)

Commissioned content at scale competitors couldn't initially match

Locked up production capacity, talent deals, and viewer attention before Disney+/HBO Max fully scaled

Formula 1 Racing

Mercedes-AMG (2014-2020)

£300-400M annually (estimated total budget)

Outspent rivals on R&D, wind tunnel time, personnel

Seven consecutive constructors' championships; competitors couldn't catch up until budget cap imposed in 2021

US Senate Races

Super PAC spending in competitive states

$100M+ per competitive seat (2022)

Unlimited independent expenditure on advertising

Drowns out candidates without billionaire backing; forces defensive spending that depletes resources

College Football

SEC conference arms race

$200-400M facilities per school

Built palatial training facilities, stadiums, practice complexes

Recruiting advantage over schools that can't match; forces other conferences into similar spending or accept talent disadvantage

Pharmaceutical R&D

Big Pharma lobbying/marketing

$30-50M per major drug launch marketing

Saturates physician networks, conferences, and media before generics or competitors launch

Generic manufacturers can't match brand awareness; biosimilar uptake slowed despite cost advantages

Local News Markets

Sinclair Broadcasting acquisitions

$10B+ in station acquisitions

Bought multiple stations per market, achieving economies of scale in production

Local independent stations can't compete on costs; consolidation reduces viewpoint diversity

Premier League Broadcasting

Sky Sports bid wars (1990s-2000s)

£5B+ for three-year rights packages

Outbid terrestrial broadcasters by massive margins

Made football unaffordable for free-to-air TV; entrenched pay-TV model

US House Races

DCCC/NRCC spending in swing districts

$5-10M per competitive district

Party committees flood districts with ads, staff, and ground operations

Self-funded or grassroots candidates can't compete for voter attention

NBA Team Building

Brooklyn Nets "super team" (2021)

$200M+ luxury tax payroll

Acquired three max-contract superstars simultaneously

Only teams with billionaire owners willing to absorb luxury tax could compete; small-market teams structurally disadvantaged

Political Consulting

Top-tier presidential campaigns

$50-100M on consultants, data, analytics

Hire all top-tier strategists, pollsters, data scientists

Credible challengers struggle to assemble competitive teams; talent locked up years in advance

Spanish Football

Real Madrid Galacticos strategy

€1B+ on superstar transfers (2000-2009)

Signed most marketable players globally (Beckham, Ronaldo, Zidane, etc.)

Commercial revenue advantages compound; smaller clubs become feeder systems

US Gubernatorial Races

Self-funding billionaire candidates

$50-100M+ personal funds

Bypass fundraising entirely; saturate media markets

Traditional politicians can't match spending; discourages viable challengers from entering

Media Acquisitions

Comcast/NBC Universal merger

$30B acquisition

Vertical integration of content production and distribution

Competitors without both production and distribution at scale disadvantaged

Olympics Bidding

Major city Olympic bids

$10-20B infrastructure commitments

Build stadiums, transit, housing before winning bid

Only wealthy nations/cities can credibly bid; developing nations priced out

Political Ground Game

Georgia Senate runoffs (2021)

$500M+ combined on both races

Hired thousands of canvassers; multiple field offices per county

Created field operation competitors couldn't match in timeline available

College Basketball

Duke/Kentucky facilities/NIL

$100M+ practice facilities; uncapped NIL deals

Built NBA-caliber practice facilities; boosters fund unlimited NIL payments

Mid-major programs can't retain top recruits even if they develop them

Super Bowl Advertising

Major brands buying multiple spots

$30-50M for multi-ad presence

Buy 4-6 slots in single game

Smaller brands can't afford even single spot; attention monopolized by incumbents


These examples demonstrate several variations on the core theme:

  • Preemptive capacity building: Netflix's content spending, NFL stadium construction, and college athletic facilities all involve building ahead of immediate need to lock in advantages.

  • Talent hoarding: Political campaigns hiring all available consultants, sports teams signing players beyond roster needs, and media companies locking up producers all prevent competitors from accessing critical human capital.

  • Attention monopolization: Super Bowl advertisers, political ad spending, and streaming content libraries all aim to crowd out competitors from limited audience attention.

  • Infrastructure lock-in: Olympic bids, college facilities, and broadcasting rights create long-term structural advantages that persist beyond the initial spending

  • Deterrence signaling: Bloomberg's billion-dollar primary campaign and Formula 1 budgets send signals that make potential competition seem futile.


The point is that although the escalation of spending worries many, it is an established strategic move.


If You are Uncomfortable with Paradox and Mystery, You Might be Uncomfortable with Life!

One of the most distinctive habits of Catholic thought is its refusal to resolve complex moral questions by choosing one pole of a tension a...